• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Hillary Clinton's Use of Personal Email Account (only) for Secretary of State Business

Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
4consideration said:
He does have intimate knowledge of the job, but I wonder what he has to say about Clinton having deleted all the emails on the server. I haven't seen what he's said, and I'd be interested to know if he's offering an opinion after some of the most recent information has surfaced, or if he was simply talking about someone in that position sometimes using personal emails. Do you have a link handy to something he's said indicating her actions were not of major concern?
Click to expand...
I would imagine he's not okay with that, but it's pure speculation on my part. I imagine that Powell does feel somewhat betrayed but his government and may share that feeling with Ms. Clinton. I don't know though. In all honesty, I probably think she ought to have let a third party not her staff go through the emails, but at the same time I can understand her wanting someone who's familiar with her to do the job.

No easy answers, I'm afraid.

Republican Colin Powell Deals a Death Blow to Hillary Clinton Email Scandal

ETA: I find the title of the article salacious. I'd say "unnecessarily salacious" but I think in general salaciousnes is unnecessary.
 
4consideration

4consideration

*
Premium Member
Marisa said:
I would imagine he's not okay with that, but it's pure speculation on my part. I imagine that Powell does feel somewhat betrayed but his government and may share that feeling with Ms. Clinton. I don't know though. In all honesty, I probably think she ought to have let a third party not her staff go through the emails, but at the same time I can understand her wanting someone who's familiar with her to do the job.

No easy answers, I'm afraid.

Republican Colin Powell Deals a Death Blow to Hillary Clinton Email Scandal

ETA: I find the title of the article salacious. I'd say "unnecessarily salacious" but I think in general salaciousnes is unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link.

I had a general understanding that CP had used a personal email account to some degree , but didn't know to what extent, or whether or not he had defended Hillary's actions in any way.
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
4consideration said:
Thanks for the link.

I had a general understanding that CP had used a personal email account to some degree , but didn't know to what extent, or whether or not he had defended Hillary's actions in any way.
Click to expand...
My read of the article is that he neatly sidestepped the question.
 
C

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I'm pretty tech stupid. I did not understand why this was even an issue, much less a scandal.
In a world of wikileaks and Snowdens I could understand why she might want to use equipment she trusts more.

I don't even understand why she'd need two devices, but I have never had a BlackBerry. Every device I have ever had could access two separate email accounts.
It is the weakness of the excuse that I find so suspicious. I broke the law regarding top level government business because I couldn't fit two phones in my purse? Seriously?
Tom
 
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
columbus said:
I'm pretty tech stupid. I did not understand why this was even an issue, much less a scandal.
In a world of wikileaks and Snowdens I could understand why she might want to use equipment she trusts more.

I don't even understand why she'd need two devices, but I have never had a BlackBerry. Every device I have ever had could access two separate email accounts.
It is the weakness of the excuse that I find so suspicious. I broke the law regarding top level government business because I couldn't fit two phones in my purse? Seriously?
Tom
Click to expand...
That's totally plausible to me, but then I carry small purses, not the these relative suitcases you see some women carrying. LOL
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
columbus said:
I'm pretty tech stupid. I did not understand why this was even an issue, much less a scandal.
In a world of wikileaks and Snowdens I could understand why she might want to use equipment she trusts more.

I don't even understand why she'd need two devices, but I have never had a BlackBerry. Every device I have ever had could access two separate email accounts.
It is the weakness of the excuse that I find so suspicious. I broke the law regarding top level government business because I couldn't fit two phones in my purse? Seriously?
Tom
Click to expand...
My guess is that Clinton and crew are banking on the unwashed electorate not being very tech savvy. It might be a bit more palatable if she setup her own super-secure system and THEN initiated iron-clad procedures at state. There is little evidence to support that she actively endeavored to fix the security holes in the State servers. But hey, in her own words, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Let the coronation continue...
 
Brickjectivity

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
YmirGF said:
I don't get how anyone with even primitive tech awareness would not see this as being a huge potential problem, let alone someone as aware as you.
Click to expand...
When I think of a huge potential problem I think of the cowardly way that our private information is being siphoned up by unelected minions at the NSA. They have no business in my personal business. That is a huge potential problem being overlooked and shifted into the background. Who cares where the secretary kept the emails? The NSA has a copy already. That's tech awareness. Her email was secure. If anyone tapped her email, the NSA knew. This whole thing is a bunch of BS.
 
C

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Brickjectivity said:
I don't either.
Click to expand...

Why there is such a law I don't know. But there is one. And she deliberately broke it.
That is the problem.

To me this is a bigger deal than Benghazi. That was a complicated mess with no good options. Here we have a top government official deciding to do the job her way, even though the law said differently.
Tom
 
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
YmirGF said:
My guess is that Clinton and crew are banking on the unwashed electorate not being very tech savvy. It might be a bit more palatable if she setup her own super-secure system and THEN initiated iron-clad procedures at state. There is little evidence to support that she actively endeavored to fix the security holes in the State servers. But hey, in her own words, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Let the coronation continue...
Click to expand...
Oh I don't think that at all. She ran against the unquestioned king of tech in her party's primaries, she's way too smart to have such a low opinion of her base.
 
Brickjectivity

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
columbus said:
Why there is such a law I don't know. But there is one. And she deliberately broke it.
That is the problem.

To me this is a bigger deal than Benghazi. That was a complicated mess with no good options. Here we have a top government official deciding to do the job her way, even though the law said differently.
Tom
Click to expand...
The article says she "...May have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record." At issue is whether she broke the requirements or not. Mrs. Clinton is not the first government official — or first secretary of state — to use a personal email account on which to conduct official business. At issue is whether any emails were deleted and/or have not been supplied to the agency.

My only concern is that this whole thing is really just detracting from the very real problem of privacy. Its extremely dangerous for the government to have access to all of our personal information. I trust neither a Republican nor a Democrat with guardianship of that, so I don't care for making a big deal out of a secretary using an offsite email address. As far as I'm concerned they can all use offsite email addresses if they'll just leave my email alone.
 
esmith

esmith

Veteran Member
I could really care less about Hillary's "private personal email's". However, the problem is we do not know, at the present time, the subject matter of the emails that were deleted. Do we really trust a politician to tell the truth? Obviously there are those who support Hillary that believe her. Do you? Is there any possible tit for tat between foreign governments donations and the Clinton foundation during the time she served as Sec of State? Are there any emails about incidents between her staff, via private email accounts, and Hillary? Well that is a yes. From : http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/u...hazi-a-rare-glimpse-at-her-concerns.html?_r=0
Mrs. Clinton’s top aides at times corresponded with her about State Department matters from their personal email accounts,
Click to expand...
Are all of these documents preserved? Guess we will have to take her word for it. Are you really sure you want someone with this type of character flaw as your President? I sure don't.
 
D

Deidre

Well-Known Member
I've always had mixed views on Hilary Clinton. Sometimes, I think she is one shady character, and then other times I think she could save the world. lol
It's time for an 'Independent' candidate to rise up.... both the democratic and repub parties are corrupt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top